kapkomet

QUOTE(CWSGuy406 @ Nov 23, 2005 -> 04:08 AM) Kap -- did you see the game? Did anyone see the game? I was at a basketball tourney... Yea, I watched most of it. These two kids are something special. They really are. If you give Ovechkin a sliver of open ice, he's gone. He made plenty of defensemen look pretty damn stupid last night. There was one play where he literally passed it to himself almost behind his back, and still managed to get a shot off. Crosby matched him. Crosby can't skate as fast, but he's got just as good of stick handling ability - and Crosby has, I would say, a better overall ice presence. These two are very, very good. The game was better then advertised.

Holy s***... these two guys on the ice at the same time is one incredible show.

This is really, really old. And furthermore, I've heard SEVERAL times, by GWB AND his administration, that they know that the two are not DIRECTLY related.

I'm staying out of this thread from here on out. /shuts up before I get in a lot of trouble...

That's great.

QUOTE(Mercy! @ Nov 22, 2005 -> 11:40 PM) And some day if your gay or straight child asks you how you voted on the Texas referendum to codify this discrimination, what will you say? "I told everyone I was against it, even though I refused to vote against it"? That's actually good. The reason I chose to not vote for it is because it shouldn't have been on the ballot in the first place. And furthermore, the way it was worded bothered me, so without having further evidence and information on the matter, I abstained. In other words, I didn't want to vote against something that I wasn't sure what I was voting against - and - again, it shouldn't have been on the ballot in the first damn place. The only reason it was there was political motivation, not for moral supremecy like these assclowns like to advertise.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Nov 22, 2005 -> 11:10 PM) I don't intend for this to be a threadjack so I won't pursue it beyond saying that the codified discrimination of American citizens on the basis of sexual orientation is not Constitutionally justifiable. I agree with that 100%.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Nov 22, 2005 -> 10:30 PM) Aren't they called graduate students? (she typed bitterly) Now THAT's funny. Cause it's true.

Wow. The arrogance shown here, no offense guys, is why it hurts the left AND the right. Who's to say who's right and who's wrong on this issue? Personally, I don't think this is a government issue at all... I think you know that. But, when I see statements above that says "we're right"... don't be so sure of yourselves. Edit: that sounded snarky, and I didn't mean for it to... just trying to point out that being so sure you're right on a highly debateable moral issue is treading on thin ice.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Nov 22, 2005 -> 10:02 PM) Probably for the same reasons I think the GOP is in trouble. Will gay marriage hurt the Dems? Absolutely. Will abortion? Probably not, because if that's as big of an issue as I think it will be this year, the bigger motivator is going to be on the pro-choice side. Ultimately, I think change will happen because we live in some sour times. Things don't feel like they're going well. Even if they are going well. And there's one way to change things in government, vote new people in. This is when I wish we had a real third party.

Ahh, so Microsoft is creating an artificial demand? How cool of them.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Nov 22, 2005 -> 09:19 PM) People don't vote for Joe Congressman like they vote for the President. It's more about why are my taxes so high, and about personality than it is about foreign policy. You want my big prediction for social/non-economic big issues next year? 1. Honesty/Integrity 2. Abortion 3. Gay Marriage If that's the case, the Dems might be in trouble. I'll explain later if I have some more time.

QUOTE(Mercy! @ Nov 22, 2005 -> 08:38 PM) If I were saying that you used the specific word “traitor,” I would have surrounded it with quotation marks. When someone says that “In order for the Democrats to gain back power, we MUST ‘lose’ in Iraq” – I MIGHT take that as the remark of a comedian, or as someone who loves to get a rise out of people regardless of the circumstances - but in either case, it is someone who is painting an entire political party as treasonous. If, on the other hand, you were merely quoting a source, could you provide a link, please? No, that was my thought, not someone else. And I'm sure, however, that the blowhards on AM radio is parroting this, but in this case (and seriously if you read most of what I say, I think these AM blowhards take it waaaaaaay too far) I think they're somewhat on the right track. Let's look at the facts. The Democrats, as of last week, really made some noise about "get the troops home." There was a lot of BS noise on the other side of the aisle about *gasp* we CAN'T do that. The Democratic position has been made very clear. The war was/is wrong, it's time to get out. You said it yourself somewhere else on this forum - something about we won the war but lost the peace, which is somewhat true. If we leave now, we will lose. And that clearly is a 'win' for the Democrats. They have basically put all their eggs into the Iraq debate, and therefore we must 'lose' the war for them to gain back power. It's pretty simple, really. That's part of the danger of playing politics with war. And I mean that on both sides of the aisle. It's VERY dangerous. I'm not questioning a Democrat's patriotism, or calling them treasonous, but I am saying that "politically" the only way they can 'win' is to make Bush's policy on Iraq 'lose', and that's (translated) get out of there now or very soon. Clarification: Get out before we're ready... meaning in the next two to six months. Realistically, I think you will see a draw down next summer, and I think it was planned that way anyway from all indications I have heard or seen. And those plans have been drawn up waaaaay before this latest call from the Dems to get our troops home. The timing is interesting in that the plans are already being made, so it's going to look like their pressure was what made some of our troops to come home. Welcome to silly ass politics 101.

Rex, one thing I didn't touch on was your comment about hurting those who make less then $100k. Please explain that more - because I know you were just out there listening to people and I'm curious on your take.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Nov 22, 2005 -> 08:03 PM) I'd disagree with you here. I think Iraq is only an issue in the campaign if Iraq is still an issue. Rarely do administrations and majorities win on foreign policy "victories." If that were the case, the Dems should have taken back Congress in 98. And Bush 1 should have won in 92. If Iraq stops being such an issue, then it gets to bread and butter, pocketbook politics. And that's why the GOP hurts right now. It's put itself in a bad position to market itself to all the people that make under 100K a year on economic issues. This is a situation where the GOP has to hope that the Dems can't get people to the polls - because if they do, they lose. 2006 will be entirely about base motivation, not about swing voters and not about Iraq. It will be "How pissed off, concerned, motivated can we get our core constituents so that they'll vote this year?" But what is the referendum about right now? What were all the analysts chomping on during the losses this year? It was about George W. Bush and his handling of Iraq. I agree part of what you're saying, but 2006 looms VERY large as far as the #1 issue of the day, and that's Iraq. The Democrats have to make it look like George Bush screwed the pooch on his Iraq policy. Frankly, the economy isn't news because it's not that bad right now. If it were bad, you would have the media hounds going ballistic about how bad things suck right now. It's good, so that's why you don't hear about it. It's all about Iraq and making Bush look like either a liar, or totally misguided. And, if we "win" over there, it makes Bush look better, and that's hard to swallow. The only issue the Dems can win on right now is the firecracker issue of Iraq. Caveat: that could change a LOT in a year.

So basically, it would seem that unless you have a HDTV of some type, this really is no big deal?

QUOTE(Mercy! @ Nov 22, 2005 -> 07:51 PM) Son, you might want to look up yonder and see who started this thread. When someone drops into a pretty good discussion and starts up with the Dems are traitors who give aid and comfort to the enemy talk, as Kap just did, yes, I am disgusted. Or maybe exasperated would be a better choice of words. But in my brief time in this forum, if I needed a model for a poster who did nothing but drop into political discussions with a sarcastic remark and then disappear, I need look no farther than you. Why don't you add to the discussion with something positive, or at least constructive? Where did I say the word "traitor"? That's not what I said. Reading is part comprehension, you know.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Nov 22, 2005 -> 06:55 PM) If that proved to be the case, they would no longer have a job in my administration. So sayeth the President of Flaxxlandia.

Here's the bottom line. In order for the Democrats to gain back power, we MUST "lose" in Iraq. Remember, they have painted this as George W. Bush's war, and his policy MUST fail for them to gain back power. If the job gets done over there, the war is a success, and the party in power wins. What a nice position to put yourself in. That's why the Dems have more trouble then they know what to do with on this issue. And, it's quite interesting that one Democrat is waaaaaaaaaaaaaay far away from all the others on this issue - Hillary Rodham Clinton. I wonder why?

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Nov 22, 2005 -> 06:21 PM) In that case, I'll have my people read it. Damn, I wish I had "people" that could do s*** for me like that. But be careful, those people might mislead you as to what's really in it. /I had to say it.

Interesting. It does support what I was saying last week.

Flaxx, I would never question your patriotism. I know you better then that. But, at the same time, I think criticizing every living, breathing word coming from the White House, just because the White House says it, gets old. And I'm not talking from you specifically. It's the climate we're living in right now.

QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Nov 22, 2005 -> 04:10 PM) I've gotten over 23,000 hits alone from this goofy X story. I've also now got mentioned on rawstory.com and world net daily. My picture is on the front of rawstory.com now too, unreal. Now I gotta get back to reality and do some homework. Welcome to the big show, Kip.

QUOTE(Palehosefan @ Nov 22, 2005 -> 03:27 AM) Yeah, what a crappy webmaster. Yea, if I didn't have a crappy programmer behind it all, I'd be even better. Seriously, palehosefan does some pretty kick ass stuff. And what he doesn't know, he figures out pretty quick. That's a good thing.

Yea, before taxes.